/m/yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

The Yankees' accountant is probably grinning ear to ear. Selig's finally got the big hide to pin on his mantle. Bonds and Clemens may have escaped, but A-Rod didn't.

This, along with Braun, would appear to establish the precedent that the Commissioner does have the power under the Best Interests clause to go beyond the JDA in suspensions for particularly noxious offenders, no?

Why does anyone care that the Yankees get off the hook for his salary? There is nobody worth signing. Unless you are really concerned with Hal Steinbrenner's bottom line, there is nothing good about this for the Yankees.

Because I'm pretty sure that even with their wild spending this winter, it puts them under the luxury tax threshold if they don't sign Tanaka (or, I suppose, sign him to a preposterously long contract with a lower-than-expected AAV). Can anyone confirm/deny this?

Why does anyone care that the Yankees get off the hook for his salary? There is nobody worth signing. Unless you are really concerned with Hal Steinbrenner's bottom line, there is nothing good about this for the Yankees.

Because it's bullshit that the Yankees are going to get under the luxury tax threshold because of a hugely out of line suspension from Selig that has been remarkably upheld.

It seems odd to me that the Bud is helping the Yankees get under the threshold (taking money directly out of the pockets of small market owners) but it appears that the only thing the Bud has wanted for the past couple years is A-Rod's head on a plate, and the Yankees happened to be the enemy of his enemy in this case.

It seems odd to me that the Bud is helping the Yankees get under the threshold (taking money directly out of the pockets of small market owners) but it appears that the only thing the Bud has wanted for the past couple years is A-Rod's head on a plate, and the Yankees happened to be the enemy of his enemy in this case.

The luxury tax money doesn't go to the small market owners, but rather to Bud's own slush fund. He's only hurting himself....and his slushy henchmen.

I still don't get how the suspension saves the Yankees all that much in luxury tax terms. The player is still signed to a long term contract, and the luxury tax is still calculated on the basis of AAV of long-term contracts. Shouldn't this only reduce the luxury tax total by 1/10 of A-Rod's 2014 salary?

Also, Sherman's statement makes no sense at all, and how the hell does Lester Munson have a job?

I'm looking forward to hearing from all the dipshits who actually thought the suspension would be overturned. There were quite a few of them around here, and they were wrong about that, just like they're wrong about practically everything.

I am furious about this and 100% on A-Rods side. If you told me that I'd feel this way a year ago about A-Rod, I'd have said that it was crazytalk. This is a huge favor to the Yankees, if YR ever complains about how MLB is stacked against the Yankees again he should be fired out of the cannon.

A 50 or 100 game suspension, that's what should have come out of this if the arbiter wasn't just a management stooge.

So I can't figure out if this means the yanks are less likely to sign tanaka now.

I think it does, as they are now under the threshold but will go over if they sign him. But I could be wrong; there seems to be confusion on the issue. Anyone got a solid link proving whether they're over or under after this?

I'm looking forward to hearing from all the dipshits who actually thought the suspension would be overturned. There were quite a few of them around here, and they were wrong about that, just like they're wrong about practically everything.

I don't know for sure, but my vague memory is that there were lots of people who thought A-Rod would win a federal court case. And of course he still may. How many of them specifically thought the arbitrator would overturn it, I don't recall, but it's possible some of them did. In any event, this is not the last word on how many games A-Rod will miss so people with bets out there are still in the running

Probably. They're at $177M without any of the arbitration awards factored in. It's a safe bet that between Gardner, Robertson and Nova they'll be over $189M. I suppose they could try and dump some salary, but who is going to take any of their shitty contracts?

Isn't it unlikely that a judge or court would overrule a decision reached through binding arbitration? Even though a member of the three-person panel stepped off the panel during the hearing to testify against A-Rod, before resuming his role as an impartial arbiter, both sides accepted it and MLB has anti-trust in its hip pocket. Anyway, assuming Rodriguez could get a TRO, wouldn't it only end up bisecting his suspension between the 2014 and 2015 seasons?

Isn't it unlikely that a judge or court would overrule a decision reached through binding arbitration?

You would think so. Could there be some cause of action other than directly questioning the validity of what was collectively bargained?

Even though a member of the three-person panel stepped off the panel during the hearing to testify against A-Rod, before resuming his role as an impartial arbiter, both sides accepted it and MLB has anti-trust in its hip pocket.

Did A-Rod's layers accept that, or just the MLBPA?

Anyway, assuming Rodriguez could get a TRO, wouldn't it only end up bisecting his suspension between the 2014 and 2015 seasons?

Maybe that's something he wants. Seems to me that he doesn't want to miss an entire season. Maybe he thinks that would effectively end his career, whereas playing the first half of 2014 and the second half of 2015 wouldn't. Who knows?

Is the luxury tax too low now considering the bump every team got from the national tv deals and that some teams are cashing in on huge local tv deals? Are MLB players getting a far lower % of league revenue than NBA, NFL and NHL players?

I still don't get how the suspension saves the Yankees all that much in luxury tax terms. The player is still signed to a long term contract, and the luxury tax is still calculated on the basis of AAV of long-term contracts. Shouldn't this only reduce the luxury tax total by 1/10 of A-Rod's 2014 salary?

No, because the contract didn't change. Otherwise it would reduce their luxury tax burden for the entirety of the contract (and MLB would have to cut the Yankees a check in luxury tax overpayments since 2008).

Anyway, I do recall reading something (from Stark I think) way bak at the beginning of the Biogenesis story about how salaries of suspended players till counting toward luxury tax.

At the beginning the reports went back and forth on that, but it's been since confirmed that it doesn't, since the team is not paying any salary to the player. PED suspensions are penalties against the player, not the team.

When in the collective bargaining era of MLB history has a court ever stayed or overturned an arbitrator's decision?

It can happen. One example: Following the collusion settlement, Steve Garvey claimed damages and applied for some of the money. The Players Association rejected his claim. Garvey then appealed to an arbitrator and lost. Garvey then took it out of baseball to the Court of Appeals, which overturned the arbitrator's decision.

It's tricky, though. I know that when I go on a two-week vacation, there's always a moment (it gets longer and more powerful as I age) towards the end of it where I say "I don't want to get up early and do this anymore."

Rod will have - what, 14 months? to sit around and get used to not playing, not eating like an athlete, not working out every day. Maybe he sleeps in and plays video games. Maybe he gets all potted up and moves to Colorado.

All I've seen so far is the headline but it's clear my prediction of what the arbitrator would do was very wrong. I figured on 50-65 games as the best bet, 0 games as the second best bet, and anything over 100 to be very surprising (and thus make me flat wrong).

Except... if in federal court ARod has a better outcome then I withdraw my assessment of being wrong. It will be difficult for ARod to prevail there, though, for structural reasons.

Granted I haven't seen the evidence, obviously, but I'm interested in seeing how structurally Horowitz justified the penalty per the JDA/CBA.

And ARod is right: this is very bad for the players, although many of them don't realize it.

If there's one thing that's clear about A-Rod, it's that he loves baseball. Loves baseball. After games he goes home and watches baseball. There's no way he's giving away 30 million dollars in exchange for not playing baseball anymore - that's a lose-lose for him.

ESPN's legal analyst thinks A-Rod may get an injunction but that it would be quickly overturned. He also thinks a judge won't overturn the decision and that A-Rod is basically done.

The think that strikes me as odd about A-Rod's response to the decision is that they will attempt to argue that this is merely a way to get rid of guaranteed contracts for the next CBA, and that this is an end-run around that negotiated right. That has me thinking they're grasping at straws and that they desperately want the player's union to get involved so that this becomes a contractual matter (and not an "unfair arbitrator" matter).

79: My bet would be that Sherman is wrong and SG is right. MSM writes never seem to pay any attention to how lux tax is really calculated; they tend to just add up current year salaries, or copy a top line number from somebody else.

EDIT: as I suspected, Sherman's number looks suspiciously like Cot's minus A-Rod. Either way, doesn't include Thornton and Roberts. Yahoo Sports puts them at $189.2M

Baseball Ref has estimated $172 with A-Rod, but I think that's wrong. It has Vernon Wells money coming off the books, but no salary for him. It also doesn't have whatever Brian Roberts salary is. I'd guess that the estimate right now should be about $165 in salary.

Are centaurs and horses friends? Or do centaurs look down on horses as inferior beings? I'm not sure if the centaurs would have a special affinity for the animals that they share so much with, or if there would be a sense of revulsion. Maybe they're racist against horses.

81: Having trouble editing. As I said, Sherman's number looks suspiciously like Cot's minus A-Rod. And that doesn't include Thornton and Roberts. Yahoo Sports puts the Yankees at $189.2M for signed players (including Thornton and Roberts) plus benefits.

And finally, whatever the correct number is, it's only for ~15 players under contract. Robertson, Gardner, and Nova will cost ~$12M in arbitration. Seven or eight more guys making the minimum would be ~$4M. And lux tax is on 40-man roster, not 25.

Are centaurs and horses friends? Or do centaurs look down on horses as inferior beings? I'm not sure if the centaurs would have a special affinity for the animals that they share so much with, or if there would be a sense of revulsion. Maybe they're racist against horses.

Are centaurs and horses friends? Or do centaurs look down on horses as inferior beings? I'm not sure if the centaurs would have a special affinity for the animals that they share so much with, or if there would be a sense of revulsion. Maybe they're racist against horses.

An interesting question. Sort of like wondering if merpeople eat fish or if werewolves get fleas.

Even if A-Rod lawyers himself onto the roster, will it be worth it for any reason other than spite (and who is he, Murray Chass?) when he gets stapled to the bench? I don't see how he could prove in court that the Yankees actually think he's a better player than Michael Young.

(Admittedly, it's possible the Yanks would want to play him -- certainly their attitude last year was "if he's here, he's playing." But I think things have changed, and although the Yanks still intellectually realize A-Rod is better than Young, they'd nonetheless rather play Young and have A-Rod go away.)

If my understanding of evolution is correct, werewolves are likely to be infected with a unique species of flea that is capable of thriving in both human and wolfman environments. In fact, this may be the best possible way to identify a werewolf between full moons.

Not without a settlement of some kind. He's not walking away from $61M.

Oh, I agree. But I would think the Yankees would pay $30M to walk away.

But why would he take that? The maximum salary he's going to lose from this is one season, $25 million, and then he's back in action in 2015. If he's unable to play after that the Yankees owe him the remainder.

Assuming A-Rod used illegal PEDs and messed with the investigation, I think the suspension is warranted.

Only thing that should be made clear for future precedent is 50 games for offense, 112 games for conduct.

If I am a member of MLBPA, I wouldn't give a s&*t about guys like A-Rod and Braun who are 1) supremely gifted, 2) knowingly cheat (using a shady doctor says it all) and 3) proclaim innocence and use MLBPA as a shield.

Is A-Rod the likely leader now in career ABs on juice? I'd guess he's used non-stop since at least the 1st year with the Rangers. Maybe Canseco or McGwire still have the career lead?

Is he allowed to? I would imagine that a standard baseball player contract would include some language about requiring the team's authorization for other athletic events. Hell, I remember somebody (Aaron Boone?) falling afoul of his contract because he played a pickup basketball game, or something like that.

Does ARod's contract not include such a thing? Or is he not required to abide by it during the terms of the suspension?